Uleria, CA, and runic associations

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
Other mail archives: !!!!!!> Visit the Search Engine of Lhankor Mhy <!!!!!!

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_cs.ucc.ie>
Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 21:03:56 GMT

Bob Stancliff:
> Actually, I sent the first 200-300 words to Greg Sez at issaries,inc to
> see if I could get any directed response from Greg. He edited it down under
> 100 words and responded with a paraphrase of the rule book, followed by the
> circular argument that Uleria is a Fertility goddess because she has a
> Fertility spell, when part of my initial argument was that she shouldn't
> have a Fertility spell or the Fertility rune.

I found it a much more convincing argument that you, it wouldn't certainly seem.

As far as a can see, your point rests not on saying that given the stated meanings of the runes (see RQ3 bk5, most notably), the goddesses have the 'wrong' association, but rather, that your saying that the _meanings_ are incorrect? If so, you're on very thin ice, as Greg has certainly made clear that a rune is not summable-up just from its notional title, so how else do you propose to determine what the 'true' meaning of the 'Fertility' rune is?

Cheers,
Alex.